Altered ‘statement of belief’ stirs up Christian college community

When officials at Bryan College modified a part of the school’s “statement of belief” concerning the origin of the human race in February, the change generated controversy among students and faculty at the small, Christian liberal arts college in Dayton, Tenn.

Once the school reignited the evolution vs. creationism debate, the updated statement of belief, which faculty must sign as part of their contract, was distributed to professors.

Stephen Barnett, a professor of natural science at Bryan, and Steven DeGeorge, chair of Bryan’s education department, signed the original statement but added footnotes saying they would neither affirm nor deny the clarification.

After learning that their contracts would not be renewed, they sued the school on May 12. According to J. Edward Nanney, the lawyer for Barnett and DeGeorge, the first formal hearing of the lawsuit was held on May 16, while the trial is set to be held in May 2015. In addition, at least seven other of the college’s 44 full-time professors are leaving the school, he says.

Barnett and DeGeorge are hoping to get their jobs back and to get the clarification nullified by the courts. The lawsuit, filed in the Rhea County Chancery Court in Dayton, states that by adding a clarification to the statement of belief, Bryan College was violating the college charter.

The charter says the statement “shall never be changed or amended, but shall constitute the religious position and belief of the institution as long as it shall endure.”

Section 4 of Bryan’s statement of belief states that “the origin of man was by fiat of God.” Yet, Bryan’s president, Stephen Livesay, says that in recent years, it became “increasingly apparent” that the college’s stance on creation required clarification.

In February, the board of trustees offered a clarification of the statement of belief that all humans descended from Adam and Eve, who are “historical persons created by God in a special formative act, and not from previously existing life forms.”

Livesay says that the clarification is not a change in Bryan’s statement of belief, but rather an explanation of what the school has always advocated.

“This does not change the teaching of the faculty — we will continue to expose our students to various theories including evolution,” Livesay says. “The difference is that we believe that the Scripture is the word of God and is absolute truth, and we believe as truth the narrative of creation as recorded in Genesis.”

Nanney says that both Barnett and DeGeorge are not ideologically at odds with the language of the clarification. Instead, he says, their concerns are a matter of principle.

“This isn’t another Scopes trial,” Nanney says. “It’s not about what is the correct version of creation. It’s a disagreement with the administration and the board of trustees on what they’ve done with regard to the historical statement of belief.”

Cameron Hawley, a rising senior and business major at Bryan, says he chose to attend the school because of the room for discussion that the college allows on Christian topics. However, he says the clarification of the statement of faith puts this open environment in jeopardy.

“It’s going to slowly turn Bryan College into a niche kind of school, where the only people that are attracted to this kind of place are one specific belief type,” Hawley says. “Part of the appeal of Bryan is that you can have different beliefs in the realm of Christianity and still not be persecuted for it.”

Yet for Hawley and many other Bryan students and alumni, the biggest problem with the clarification isn’t its substance. Rather, they are bothered by the misrepresentation by the administration of the Bryan community’s sentiments. Last month, Livesay told the Times Free Press that the campus community was “solid” and that students were happy in the wake of the clarification.

Such comments sparked student protests at Bryan, which took the form of a social media campaign known as #HearMyVoiceBC. Students posted on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, sharing their thoughts and demanding that their voices be heard.

I want my school to be known for what it is for, not what it is against. #hearmyvoiceBC

“Why did Dr L say that Bryan was solid and we were happy just weeks after our petition and the faculty no confidence vote? #hearmyvoiceBC,” wrote Allison Baker, a graduating senior and English major, on Twitter.

Other students showed their dissatisfaction regarding the departure of several Bryan faculty members.

“Since when does a ‘solid’ campus allow for several professors to leave in silent protest? #hearmyvoiceBC,” wrote another student Jessalyn Pierce, a rising senior and biblical studies major, .

Hawley says the student body felt “a little betrayed” at being portrayed in the media as content with the modification of the school’s statement of belief. He adds that his main source of frustration is the administration’s course of action.

“That sets a precedent in the future that shows that no matter what the faculty and students believe, we can still be suppressed,” Hawley says. “Decisions can be made no matter what.”

Christopher Bernard, who graduated from Bryan last May, says he was upset with the timing of the clarification. It felt rushed, he says, and didn’t allow professors much time to seek other options if they felt they couldn’t sign the statement of belief in good conscience.

“I’m no theologian,” Bernard says. “The substance … is not that much of an issue for me personally. It does limit things a little bit, but from what I can tell, I don’t think most of the professors have been in real disagreement with this. I think a lot of this is due more to the way it was done.”

Despite these concerns, Livesay maintains that all is well on Bryan’s campus.

“The students’ voices have been heard, and I appreciate that they care so very much for their teachers and school to take an active role in the conversation,” Livesay says.

While the controversy surrounding the clarification has caused tension in Bryan’s campus atmosphere, Hawley says there have been positives.

“Faculty and student relations have actually improved significantly,” Hawley says. “People have bonded a lot more and have spent a lot more time together.”

As for what’s next for students and faculty at Bryan, Hawley is unsure. As far as he’s concerned, he says, most of the damage has already been done. Instead, he’s looking to the future.

“I want to see what the environment is like and how Dr. Livesay interacts with the student government again,” Hawley says. “I think it’ll take time to see what happens.”